Free Essays on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

The Origins of Cognitive Behavior Therapy Cognitive behavior therapy was devised in the late 1950s and early 1960s by Albert Ellis, Ph.D. in New York and by Aaron Beck, M.D. in Philadelphia. Although they worked independently of each other, both Ellis and Beck had grown dissatisfied with the traditional Freudian psychoanalytic therapies. Though both of these men trained with Freud, they believed that peoples’ conscious beliefs and thought processes were very important in understanding how people became depressed, anxious, or disturbed. Freudian psychoanalytic theory, on the other hand, tended to de-emphasize conscious thought. By the late 1950s, advances in behavioral science and experimental psychology had raised questions of the main assumptions of psychoanalysis, and new theories of the human mind were being introduced. â€Å"There are actually several kinds of Cognitive-Behavioral therapies (spelled behavioural in British English), employing the same general premise: in contrast to the psychodynamic emphasis on insight into unconscious motivation, the cognitive-behavioral therapies emphasize the ability of people to make changes in their lives without having to understand why the change occurs.† (Richmond, 2001) The Theory behind Cognitive Behavior Therapy By 1962, research into human emotion found that people’s thoughts, beliefs, and assumptions regarding events were important in guiding emotional experience (Carson, B.M. 2000). For example, important research showed that people labeled their physiological arousal according to the environmental situation they perceived. Experiments demonstrated that the physical effects of adrenaline could be labeled as fear, anger, or giddiness, depending on the person’s assumptions and thoughts about their situation. Because people's thoughts had such powerful effects on their emotional experience and emotional behavior, scientists were forced to devise new theories to account for th... Free Essays on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Free Essays on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy The Origins of Cognitive Behavior Therapy Cognitive behavior therapy was devised in the late 1950s and early 1960s by Albert Ellis, Ph.D. in New York and by Aaron Beck, M.D. in Philadelphia. Although they worked independently of each other, both Ellis and Beck had grown dissatisfied with the traditional Freudian psychoanalytic therapies. Though both of these men trained with Freud, they believed that peoples’ conscious beliefs and thought processes were very important in understanding how people became depressed, anxious, or disturbed. Freudian psychoanalytic theory, on the other hand, tended to de-emphasize conscious thought. By the late 1950s, advances in behavioral science and experimental psychology had raised questions of the main assumptions of psychoanalysis, and new theories of the human mind were being introduced. â€Å"There are actually several kinds of Cognitive-Behavioral therapies (spelled behavioural in British English), employing the same general premise: in contrast to the psychodynamic emphasis on insight into unconscious motivation, the cognitive-behavioral therapies emphasize the ability of people to make changes in their lives without having to understand why the change occurs.† (Richmond, 2001) The Theory behind Cognitive Behavior Therapy By 1962, research into human emotion found that people’s thoughts, beliefs, and assumptions regarding events were important in guiding emotional experience (Carson, B.M. 2000). For example, important research showed that people labeled their physiological arousal according to the environmental situation they perceived. Experiments demonstrated that the physical effects of adrenaline could be labeled as fear, anger, or giddiness, depending on the person’s assumptions and thoughts about their situation. Because people's thoughts had such powerful effects on their emotional experience and emotional behavior, scientists were forced to devise new theories to account for th...

Proper Punctuation for Appositive Phrases

Proper Punctuation for Appositive Phrases Proper Punctuation for Appositive Phrases Proper Punctuation for Appositive Phrases By Mark Nichol When two terms that mean the same thing are introduced in succession in a sentence, careless writers, by omitting a crucial comma, often imply that the definition of the terms is in fact distinct. Here are some examples of misleading statements, plus discussions and revisions. 1. â€Å"Sunlight is a mixture of different colors or wavelengths, which combine to form white light.† Colors and wavelengths are, for practical purposes, the same thing, but â€Å"colors or wavelengths† implies otherwise. To signal that wavelengths is an alternative term for colors, it should be set off in an appositive phrase: â€Å"Sunlight is a mixture of colors, or wavelengths, that combine to form white light.† (Notice, too, the replacement of which with that and the deletion of the comma that followed it not all colors, or wavelengths, combine to form white light; only these do. I also deleted the usually superfluous adjective different.) 2. â€Å"Its odd properties are essential for the evolution and survival of life on Earth, particularly given its ability to form a weak connection called a hydrogen or H-bond.† The weak connection is not called a hydrogen or H-bond, and it does not have the alternative names hydrogen and H-bond, both of which possibilities are suggested by this statement; the choices are â€Å"hydrogen bond† and H-bond. To indicate that H-bond is a distinct term, that it is not an alternative to hydrogen alone, and that it is an abbreviation of â€Å"hydrogen bond† requires a minimal pair of corrections: the use of the full phrase â€Å"hydrogen bond† and the insertion of a comma after that phrase. The revision is â€Å"Its odd properties are essential for the evolution and survival of life on Earth, particularly given its ability to form a weak connection called a hydrogen bond, or H-bond.† 3. â€Å"Then, as that part of Earth passes out of the gravitational bulge, the tide goes out or ebbs.† Again, the lack of a comma between two terms separated by or implies distinct meanings (suggesting that going out and ebbing are different actions), but this sentence, in describing a scientific phenomenon, explains a process and then supplies a perhaps unfamiliar synonym, so a comma should divide them. But there’s another problem one that I haven’t seen discussed in writing guides or grammar handbooks but that has always bothered me: Why, when introducing a new term, supply the better-known synonym or a definition first what’s the use of including the new term if it’s not presented before the aid to comprehension? It seems more logical to provide the new term first, then provide context: â€Å"Then, as that part of Earth passes out of the gravitational bulge, the tide ebbs, or goes out.† (The second example in this post at least positions the appositive terms sensibly, and the first example does not apply, as one term does not define the other, as here, or clarify it, as in the second example.) Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Punctuation category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:10 Grammar Mistakes You Should AvoidStory Writing 101The Difference Between "Un-" and "Dis-"